MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 9049, 7 February 1908, Page 6

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

MASTERTON—THURSDAY

(Before Mr W. P. James, S.M.)

UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment for plaintiff by default was given in each of the following debt cases:—H. T. Jackson v. Thos, Carroll, claim £4 15s lOd, costs 10s; H. Peterson v. A. Noonan, claim 18s Gd, costs ss; D. Finlayson v. Wm. Heggie, claim £1 10s 2d, costs ss. A TENANCY CASE. Ester Sheen, widow, sued Mrs J. Mitchell for £2 12s 6d for rent alleged to be due on a house owned by plaintiff and occupied by defendant. Defendant and her husband counter claimed £4 2s 6d for work done in and about the house and for removal expenses. Mr D. K. Logan appeared for Mrs Sheen, and Mr B. J. Dolan for the defendant. Mrs Mitchell said that when she decided to take the house from Mrs Sheen at 17s 6d per week, payable monthly, she understood from a conversation with her that she was to have the house for a long period. However, after a short tenancy, she received three weeks' notice to quit. Witness was a nurse and she found such a short notice very inconvenient, as she had a bad patient under her care at the time. Mrs Sheen, in her evidence, denied that there was any understanding as to a long tenancy, of the house. In addition she gave Mrs Mitchell five weeks notice to leave, as the house'was required by her daughter. W. M. Cole, a former employee of Mr W. H. Cruickshank, agent for the house, said he let the House to Mrs Mitchell on the ordinary terms. The tenancy was a weekly one, but it was understood that the rent was not necessarily to be paid weekly. Nothing was said as far as he could remember about the house being let for any definite period. His Worship said he was satisfied that there was no contract, and if people choose to take houses without some contract they had to run the risk of heing turned out. No doubt Mrs Mitchell had been somewhat roughly treated. Judgment would be given for plaintiff on the claim for the full amount with 6s cos*:. Having heard the evidence regarding the counter claim his Worship dismissed it. OVERDUE RATES. The Masterton County Council claimed from Adam Armstrong, of Carterton, the sum of £4 18s lOd, for special rates due by the defendant on the Piripi Native Reserve for the years 1906-7 and 1907-8. After hearing" the evidence of the County Clerk and some legal arguments, Mr T. B. Maunsell, on behalf of the defendrant, applied for an adjournment. This was refused and judgment was entered for plaintiffs with £1 12s costs. Dr. Trimble appeared for the plaintiff. A CLALV FOR COMMISSION. Joseph Williams, commission agent, sued John Hunter, builder, and his wife, Elizabeth Anne Hunter, for £ls 15s commission on the sale of a house in Walton Avenue to Mrs A. W. Birss. Mr B. J. Dolan appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr H. C. Robinson for the defendants. Mr Dolan, in outlining his case, said that the plaintiff was in business for himself as an agent, but he frequently effected sales in co-operation with other agents in Masterton on the share basis. Some time previous to November, Hunter gave the property in question into Ross and Co.'s hands, for sale, the price being .£430. The commission to sell was only verbal. Plaintiff was then working for Ross and Co.. not as a servant or even as a sub-agent, but simply in conjunction with them.' In addition to Ross and Co. employing plaintiff on their own account without any reference to Hunter, the latter also gave plaintiff a verbal commission to sell. In pursuance of that contract of employment, Williams saw Mr Birss, and took him to see the house. The latter seemed inclined t.o purchase, but he was not prepared to pay. a deposit. Counsel would prove that Birss had not known Hunter previous to the negotiations for the sale of the house, and reciprocally that Hunter had not known Birss, and that the introduction between the two parties had been brought about by Williams. Hunter and Williams, in company with Mr Birss, went to see the latter's wife concerning the purchase, and eventually the sale was effected. The sale having been completed through Williams' instrumentality the latter sent Hunter an account for the commission, which he refused to recognise. Mr Robinson, for the defence, said that Hunter placed two houses in Walton Avenue in Ross and Co.'s hands for hale. One day, Williams j accosted Hunter in the street and asked him if they were his houses in Walton Avenue that were in Ross and Co.'s hands. The next time Hunter saw Williams, the latter said that Birss wanted to buy his house, but he could net pay a deposit. v Williams then made elaborate statements concerning Birss' financial position. Counsel contended that if Hunter had any idea he was instructing Williams to sell his house, he would never have entered into any agreement to sell. Even if he had agreed he would obviously have made the stipulation that the commission would onlyjHbe paid out of the cash deposit on the house. After some legal argument Mr Dolan announced that he had Mr Ross' consent to join him as a plaintiff in the case. This was agreed to. Evidence having been taken, his Worship gave judgment for the plaintiffs with £3 8s costs.

Mr C. P. R Livesay, Architect of Wellington, has removed to more convenient rooms in the National Mutual Chambers, Customhouse Quay, (ad,joining the Head Office of the Manic of N.Z.)